Help needed arguing Esure's valuation

dktreesea

maddogb wrote: »

Sorry i'm confused which part was the good experience, the bit where they tried to rip you off to the tune of £1150?


They did use Glass guide, to ignore it because it didn't agree with the other two, despite the fact the other two apparently use the same set of data.


The valuation system using guides may be good for people who don't intend to replace their car with exactly the same or very similar and just want to make a bit of extra cash
I find it hard to believe the majority of road users are like that, surely they just want to be back in the same position as quickly and as hassle free as possible.
Esure obviously don't agree with that going by your and my experience.

I did have a guy from Esure saying that since I hadn't paid that much for the car (irrelevant) they weren't prepared to pay the Glass valuation. I said in that case I would need to escalate the matter to the Insurance Ombudsman as I am 100% sure that what you pay for a car has no bearing on the market value at the time of an accident. (Well, unless it was the day after you took delivery of a brand new car and wrote it off). He said he would get a senior adjustor to call me back within the hour. Sure enough, he called back to say the cheque was in the mail.


There were other things they did well though, like providing the courtesy car. That literally was driven up to the door, and the company that supplied it came and took it off us the same way when we had finished with it.

bigjl

maddogb wrote: »

Are you really so thick you don't realise that if it wasn't his fault his insurers would not be paying his claim out of their pocket?


"PPRed" I don't know what that means..


As to the removed post I got confused it was some other troll..


And what is your obsession with Ka's? I was given one once as a courtesy car, wasn't too bad but I found it too butch and masculine for me, so I went with a picanto


" well built Korean car " now theres an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah........

maddogb

dktreesea wrote: »

I did have a guy from Esure saying that since I hadn't paid that much for the car (irrelevant) they weren't prepared to pay the Glass valuation. I said in that case I would need to escalate the matter to the Insurance Ombudsman as I am 100% sure that what you pay for a car has no bearing on the market value at the time of an accident. (Well, unless it was the day after you took delivery of a brand new car and wrote it off). He said he would get a senior adjustor to call me back within the hour. Sure enough, he called back to say the cheque was in the mail.


There were other things they did well though, like providing the courtesy car. That literally was driven up to the door, and the company that supplied it came and took it off us
same way when we had finished with it.

Yeah first chap I spoke to seemed decent enough, that's the catch tho, the offer was a mere 10% rounded above the very least they would have to pay under their terms.
Second offer, surely just made to give the impression of negotiation was another 5% rounded, this was from the "senior customer relations engineer": and that I was told was the max, at that point I was also told to go to the ombudsman.
I never got the pleasure of a courtesy car as my car was written off over the phone at the time I called to report the incident straight after the bank holiday.

maddogb

bigjl wrote: »

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah........

With such eloquent sophisticated arguments against me maybe I should just give up.

bigjl

maddogb wrote: »

With such eloquent sophisticated arguments against me maybe I should just give up.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Silver-Surfer_2

bigjl wrote: »

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

I'd ignore him rather than post two bites like that.

loskie

maddogb wrote: »

With such eloquent sophisticated arguments against me maybe I should just give up.

in all the posts in your most pointless thread this is the first one that makes sense

maddogb

loskie wrote: »

in all the posts in your most pointless thread this is the first one that makes sense

pointless? maybe it's a trifle hard for you to understand but I did say I'm not good at "dumbing" things down


maybe if you pointed to what you don't understand or try linking to something that isn't an insurance funded pr stunt that may illuminate where I am going wrong?

maddogb

Right so I've decided with the law as in :


Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999
7.—(1) A seller or supplier shall ensure that any written term of a contract is expressed in plain, intelligible language.

andrewn_2

hi ive been shopping for car insurance and came acros this in google, how do i find out how much esure will pay if my car is wrote off